all of their papers pretty much have to contain some boilerplate about how sexual contact with children is exploitative and rightly prohibited. They treat this as though it's not open to question, yet if it were so self-evident, why do they need to keep saying it?
Often they'll act inquisitive about pedos' beliefs, but it's just so they can categorize us as having such-and-such cognitive distortions. They're not actually going to question whether those really ARE cognitive distortions. It's tied into the new penology, which seeks to manage risk by using statistics to figure out who's likely to offend, and then restricting their freedom on that basis.
Ideally, they'd like to set up some kind of Orwellian system where they put all your data into a database and figure out what level of risk you are, so they can use that in sentencing or civil commitment proceedings, or just as part of their routine law enforcement. So for example, suppose scientists have figured out that a foot fetish is correlated to pedophilic behavior, since it makes men want to kidnap a little girl so they can indulge their desires to do sexual play with her cute little feet; then, if you are known to have posted about a foot fetish on the Internet, they may put that data into their system as an aid to calculating what your level of risk is and therefore how closely you need to be monitored. In the future, maybe this will all be automated.
Once they've determined you're high-risk, then it's just a matter of finding some excuse to put you under restrictions; e.g. if you get caught jaywalking they may bring up all this other "risky behavior" you've been engaging in as a reason to give you some stringent probationary restrictions.